
Joel R. Glucksman
Partner
201-896-7095 jglucksman@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Authors: Joel R. Glucksman, Donald Scarinci
Date: June 19, 2014

Partner
201-896-7095 jglucksman@sh-law.com
Firm Managing Partner
201-896-4100 dscarinci@sh-law.comThe Supreme Court clarified a prior ruling on June 9 that put limits on bankruptcy judges’ powers, according to The Wall Street Journal. The unanimous ruling in the case of Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Peter H. Arkison clarifies a 2011 ruling as to on which claims the bankruptcy may give a final ruling and on which it may not.
The key issue at stake is the difference between bankruptcy judges and district judges, the news source explained. District judges are Article III judges – they are confirmed by the senate and serve for life – whereas bankruptcy judges are not. In 2011, the Supreme Court ruled that bankruptcy judges do not possess the authority to issue final rulings on certain claims because of this inferiority. Whether a bankruptcy court can make a ruling on the basis of litigant consent – in which both parties agree to let the court make a final judgment.
According to Forbes, the Supreme Court ruling on June 9 said narrowly that Executive Benefits Insurance Agency – allegedly funded with a debtor’s fraudulent conveyances – had gotten the benefit of an Article III judge’s review, despite disagreeing with the authority of the bankruptcy court in that case. However, the Court specifically and intentionally did not resolve the issue of litigant consent.
“The court specifically said it was not resolving the important issue the case presented, which is whether even with a party’s consent bankruptcy judges can enter final judgment,” Douglas Hallward-Driemeier of Ropes & Gray, lawyer for the losing party, EBIA, told the news source. “One of the reasons that is so important is it also calls into question the ability of magistrate judges to enter final judgments.”
If you have any questions about this post or would like to discuss your company’s creditors’ rights and bankruptcy matters , please contact me, Joel R. Glucksman at www.ScarinciHollenbeck.com.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

New Jersey personal guaranty liability is a critical issue for business owners who regularly sign contracts on behalf of their companies. A recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision provides valuable guidance on when a business owner can be held personally responsible for a company’s debt. Under the Court’s decision in Extech Building Materials, Inc. v. […]
Author: Charles H. Friedrich

Commercial real estate trends in 2026 are being shaped by shifting economic conditions, technological innovation, and evolving tenant demands. As the market adjusts to changing interest rates, capital flows, and workplace models, investors, owners, tenants, and developers must understand how these trends are influencing opportunities and risk in the year ahead. Overall Outlook for Commercial […]
Author: Michael J. Willner

Part 2 – Tips Excluded from Income Certain employees and independent contractors may be eligible to deduct tips from their income for tax years 2025 through 2028 under provisions included in the One Big Beautiful Bill. The deduction is capped at $25,000 per year and begins to phase out at $150,000 of modified adjusted gross […]
Author: Scott H. Novak

Part 1 – Overtime Pay and Income Tax Treatment Overview This Firm Insights post summarizes one provision of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” related to the tax treatment of overtime compensation and related employer wage reporting obligations. Overtime Pay and Employee Tax Treatment The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) generally requires that overtime be paid […]
Author: Scott H. Novak

In 2025, New York enacted one of the most consequential updates to its consumer protection framework in decades. The Fostering Affordability and Integrity through Reasonable Business Practices Act (FAIR Act) significantly expands the scope and strength of New York’s long-standing consumer protection statute, General Business Law § 349, and alters the compliance landscape for New York […]
Author: Dan Brecher

For many New Jersey businesses, growth is a primary objective for the New Year. However, it is important to recognize that growth involves both opportunity and risk. For example, business expansion often results in complex contracts, an increased workforce, new regulatory requirements, and heightened exposure to disputes. Without proactive planning, even routine growth can lead […]
Author: Ken Hollenbeck
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!